New Priorities Under the Iraq Relief Fund (IRRF)
New Priorities for Assistance Under the Iraq Relief Fund
New Priorities for U.S. Assistance Under the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund (IRRF)
Marc Grossman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs On-The-Record Briefing Washington, DC September 14, 2004
(4:45 p.m. EDT)
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Thank you all for coming. I want to make a statement today about where we stand on the Iraq reconstruction funds, and that is that the United States is committed to helping Iraqis hold national elections, as scheduled, next year on the path to a free, democratic and peaceful Iraq. And at President Bush's direction, the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, all of us, have focused the Department's energy and effort to support Iraq's political transition, train and equip Iraqi security forces, create democratic institutions and rebuild the social and economic infrastructure of a country that was devastated by decades of misrule.
As you all know, the $18.4 billion Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, the IRRF, was approved by the Congress and signed into law by President Bush on November 6, 2003, and that money, that effort by the Congress, the signing by the President, is a testament of the United States' commitment to success in Iraq. And we have taken our obligation, as did CPA and others before us, that these taxpayer funds must be managed effectively, transparently, and in support of goals for which the men and women of our armed forces and our diplomatic services are working and fighting for in Iraq.
We've worked to use these resources to address the most pressing needs of the Iraqi people and the challenges are great. Iraq will not overcome the legacy of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship and repression quickly, and threats to security have remained our greatest challenge. The security situation presents the most serious obstacle to reconstruction and economic and political development in Iraq.
Secretary Powell asked Ambassador Negroponte, who arrived in Iraq on June 28th, to lead a comprehensive review of IRRF spending and IRRF spending priorities, and all government agencies, as well as the MNFI commander, General Casey, and the multinational security transition command, Iraq commander, General Petraeus, participated in the review. Ambassador Negroponte and his team also consulted extensively with the Iraqi Interim Government to ensure that our efforts respond to the changing requirements in Iraq.
That team, Ambassador Negroponte, General Casey, General Petraeus, and their teams, they faced hard choices, but they decided that without a significant reallocation of resources to the security and law enforcement sector, the short-term stability of Iraq would be compromised, and the longer-term prospects for a free and democratic Iraq undermined.
In our report to you today that we have just concluded, an interagency examination of Ambassador Negroponte's proposals, and the Administration's consensus is that his plan, this plan developed between him and General Petraeus and General Casey offers the best way forward to advance our common goal of a stable, secure and democratic Iraq.
The proposal addresses the need to improve security, which is obviously a key to all reconstruction efforts, while devoting additional resources to improving the economic and political environment in advance of the elections, including, very importantly, accelerating employment opportunities for Iraqis. In consultation with the Congress, these changes will be implemented as quickly as possible to support Iraq's transition.
And before we take any questions, I'd just make two other points in this regard: First, and that is to say, we want to continue to spend, as quickly as possible, the money in the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund and give you some numbers to show you where that trend is headed.
As of June 30th 2004, about $400 million of that money had been disbursed. September 1st, 2004, $1,019,000,000 had been disbursed, and as of September the 8th, which are the last figures that I have, $1,138,000,000 had been disbursed.
The second point I wanted to make in concluding here is we have given to you a short piece of paper, which shows the increases and the decreases, the reallocation that Ambassador Negroponte and his team have proposed 3.4 $3,460,000,000 worth of increases, the same amount of decreases.
I think it's important to note there under the decreases that although water and sewage decreases from 4.4 billion-150 million dollars to $1.935 billion, there will still be, therefore, $2.2 billion left in the water and sewage account. So we don't want anybody to walk away thinking that there won't be any money in these accounts left. There will still be substantial money in these accounts; and the same with electricity, which started at $5,540,000,000 down to $1,074,000,000 which still leaves $4.47 billion in electricity. In gross numbers, it's going from about half of the program to about a third.1
We think that these reallocations will provide a real chance forward here in creating additional security and law enforcement capacity, additional oil capacity, comprehensive development, debt reduction, accelerated employment and, very importantly, as we move toward the election, increases in the ability of Iraqis to have a democracy and govern themselves.
With that, let me stop and take any questions, and I'm aided today by a lot of colleagues here, Joe Bowab, and Robin Raphael and others. If I can't answer the specific questions, I'd be glad to do that.
QUESTION: Barbara Slavin from USA Today.
I wanted to ask you where Iraq stands now in terms of electricity and potable water. What percentage of the population has reliable supplies of either?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Well, it's increasing every day, and of course, today, we had a particular challenge. But as of this afternoon, the number of Iraqis who were headed back toward having electricity was going up. And one of the really interesting things that happened today, actually, and I'll get you the specific figures, but among the most interesting things that happened today in reports from our mission was the hundreds of Iraqi engineers who turned out today to try to repair the damage.
We started this morning when we all came to work with a very small percentage of Iraqis having electricity, and by the time we stand here today, a very substantial proportion of Iraqis have electricity. But I'll get you the specific figures.
QUESTION: For this year and last year?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yeah, absolutely.
QUESTION: Thank you.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Please.
QUESTION: Can you tell us specifically on the money that's being reallocated for security, does that mean there are going to be more boots on the ground? Are they more U.S. boots, are they more Iraqi boots? Have the overall numbers on the targets we're shooting for changed, or is this just speeding things up? What -- explain to us what exactly the difference is.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Well, first of all, it's not anymore American boots on the ground. Let me be clear about that. But second, it's then both of the things that you asked in terms of speeding up and increasing.
Let me give you an example or two. For example, you have on your paper there we would increase the amount of money in security and law enforcement. Well, for example, that money gives you 45,000 new Iraqi police officers. It gives you 16,000 new border control officers. It gives you 20 additional Iraqi national guard brigades. And so, the numbers there are both substantially increased and the training of those people will be much more rapid.
QUESTION: Follow up on it?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yeah, of course.
QUESTION: The Pentagon under the CPA days had a significant problem getting up to speed and getting these people online and getting these going. What is the timeframe for getting these roughly 70-some-plus thousand extra people hired?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: I don't if anybody knows the specific number. We want to do this, obviously, as quickly as possible, and that will require recruiting people, it will require building new training bases, it will require expanding capacity and all of those things are taken care of inside of these numbers.
QUESTION: So it's still a long ways off considering?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: No, I think, in terms of what we're trying to do, if you see the trend up on police, on border, and certainly on Iraqi National Guard, you know, this takes work, but I think these numbers are going to go up and up substantially.
QUESTION: Have you discussed these plans with the Iraqis? Are they part of this decision to reallocate the money?
And on the issue of water and sewage, I mean, I think -- and electricity -- I think those are some of the most important things for Iraqis to build as their quality of life is going up, and also, as you say, jobs. Is there any way to kind of combine the two, give people that are looking for jobs in those fields, you know, kind of kill two birds with one stone, so to speak?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: On both questions, first, yes, Ambassador Negroponte consulted very closely with the Iraqi Interim Government and the Iraqi interim authorities, and they are -- they recognize what our priorities are, and I think that they -- I hope they will -- recognize that what we've done here is help them meet their own goals. But, yes, there was extensive consultation done.
Secondly, in terms of electricity, water, sewage, power -- and I guess I'd answer your question two ways: first, as we saw today, that without security, there is no possibility, as many power plants as you have, to actually get electricity, water, sewage, power, to Iraqis. And so, that's why so much of this money and the reallocation that you see is moving toward security. That is the fundamental question here.
And then, second, the point about jobs and sort of trying to combine these things is exactly right. One of the things that you will see, as my colleagues are prepared to go into more detail, is a substantial amount of this money then goes into trying to create new employment opportunities. And I would say that those -- creating new employment opportunities will happen very much in these infrastructure areas.
Richard had a very good example before we came in, you know, in Najaf, where you have -- where you regain control of a city and you want to make sure that as quickly as possible, reconstruction funds are going there, people are getting employed, so people have some hope that this is a change for the better.
QUESTION: But can I just follow up?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yeah, and then I am just going to take one more.
Do you want to follow up?
QUESTION: When you say that it was --
QUESTION: Can I follow up on this?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: No, no, she is going to follow-up, and then I'll come to you.
QUESTION: When you say that you closely consulted with the Iraqi Government and they understand your priorities, would you say that these particular things that you're doing are also their priorities that they identified? Secretary Powell and the Deputy Prime Minister spoke about kind of getting the aid through a lot quicker in some of the areas that the Iraqis identified.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Oh, I think in terms of the consultation that we did, yes, I think they, as I say, understand our priorities and certainly understand the issue that if there's no security, nothing else is going to get done. And I think all the statements that the Iraqis have made show that they are part of that philosophy, and that's what we're trying to do.
But again, as I said at the end of statement, you know, don't walk out of here saying that there is no money anymore for electricity, there is no money anymore for water and sewage. That isn't true and there are still substantial amounts of money for that.
I'll take one more and then I'll turn it over to my colleagues. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Sir, I wonder if you are aware of the report that was issued by the Center of Strategic Studies on Iraq. It was a six-month study and paints a very abysmal picture of how things are in Iraq. In fact, it says that the biggest plant, the Baiji plant, electricity-producing plant is below the level that it was producing three years ago. And it says that this is really feeding into the insurgency.
It's also is critical of the way the contracts are being awarded, that Iraqis are left out of the loop, and that is actually negative in several ways because they cannot fix it, which they know how to do it, and second, they cannot refuse their kind with a lot of money that is used. And my question to you, sir, in view of the spike in violence and all this, do you expect the elections to take place in January still?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yes, I do. I take exactly the position the Secretary took, you know, on some of his Sunday shows when he was asked the same question. You know, our whole effort is to make it possible for Iraqis to hold these elections on time, as scheduled. And that's -- and as I said in my statement, it's one of the reasons that Ambassador Negroponte and his colleagues made such a big effort to make this readjustment and to make this reallocation. And we hope that you and the Congress and others who are interested in it will see it just that way.
All right. Thank you very much.
QUESTION: Are you making any provisions to award a contract to Iraqis, to Iraqi companies, the smaller companies, and so on?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: One of the things that you'll see, and again, my colleagues can do a better job of this than I can, but in the subcategory here called, "Accelerated Employment," you will see a big effort to make sure that the money that is spent, as it is today, generates Iraqi employment. And that's a crucial thing because obviously, the more people who have jobs there, the better off we're going to be.
Thank you all very much. Excuse me.
MR. BOUCHER: If I could just add one more note on that because I was out there the last time the Secretary was in Baghdad, and I remember in particular one of the meetings we had. It was with a number of Iraqi ministers from the new government, the planning minister and most of the economic ministers. And what they identified, what Prime Minister Allawi identified as priorities was training Iraqis to take security responsibility, moving money into the private sector in Iraq for Iraqi firms and Iraqi employment opportunities, and then sort of quick action projects like the cleanup in Najaf, like the -- some of the efforts that are being made in local communities.
So I'd say these, in response to the question earlier, these priorities coincide quite clearly with the kind of things that we heard from the Iraqis during the Secretary's visit in July, and they have been worked subsequently in more detail by Ambassador Negroponte with the Iraqis.
So now, if I can, for more detailed questions if you like, we can turn it over to Robin Raphel from the Near East Bureau and Joe Bowab from the people who control the money. I hate to get his title wrong, but we'll make him tell you exactly what his title is.
Please. Just continue with questions, I guess, if you want.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Yes.
QUESTION: On this question of trying to enhance and boost oil production, at one point there was some talk back in January under the old CPA, of putting together a dedicated security force for pipelines, oil infrastructures, as well as a rapid response team to try and repair them quickly. But I understood that never really quite got off the ground. Is there anything in here on that oil sector money or the employment money or the security money for trying to put together a dedicated force like that, or has that been completely scrapped?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, the oil sector money, the $450 million that is going to be shifted into the oil in this new spending plan. The concept there is that there are a small number of investments that, if we put money now in, there are strategic investments that they will allow an increase in production in the next six to eight, ten months, of 650,000 barrels per day. So it's a small investment, relatively, now in order to generate more production, which, of course, will generate more revenues. So that's the idea there.
In terms of production, in terms of protection, there is a facilities protection force that is part of the overall security forces, which comprise the police, the national guard, and so on. There are facilities protection forces, and there is one that deals with the oil facilities and pipelines, and so on. So, yes, that is -- that's part of the picture.
MR. BOWAB: This will -- there's money in there on the second line.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Ah, of the 450?
MR. BOWAB: Yeah.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Yeah. So, the answer is yes.
QUESTION: I'm sorry, what are you --
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Joe was just saying there's money in this 450 that's going to oil infrastructure to increase the funding for facilities protection for pipelines and facilities in the oil sector.
QUESTION: How much is that? Do you have any idea at this point?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: (Inaudible.)
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Yes.
QUESTION: What's the fiscal year, or what's the -- these monies go through, like, what timeframe on the calendar, you know, like?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: These monies need to be obligated by September '05. The entire IRRF supplemental needs to be obligated by September '05. It can take --
MR. BOWAB: '06, September '06.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Sorry, September '06. So it gets three-year money from '03 to '06, to be obligated but some of it will take a bit long to spend out fully.
QUESTION: Okay, follow up. Since it's a multiyear thing and you're talking about elections in January, followed by more elections, if you get a new Iraqi Government that wants to go in a totally different direction from this, are you going to be willing to work with them on that?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, certainly, we'll be willing to work with the new Iraqi Government on whatever issues they bring forward. I would add that I'd be a little bit surprised if they wanted to change these priorities too much. Security jobs, essential services, getting money into Iraqis' hands, spending quickly have been the kinds of priorities we've heard across the board from Iraqis.
QUESTION: From what I understand the police training right now is pretty much running at capacity, and although there are infrastructure issues with oil -- I mean, the biggest issue is still security and there are members of Congress who are already asking why more money is going to make a difference if you're having such a difficult time spending the money that you have. How would you address that concern?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, with regard specifically to the police, the idea is to increase the capacity in the police academies from roughly 2300 to 5300 in the coming months. So you'll have a larger capacity. And as Under Secretary Grossman said, the increase in spending on the security front will allow us to put over the next couple of years 45,000 additional Iraqi police on the street.
QUESTION: So 2300 per month to 5300 per month or?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: As the capacity in the academies, any given time, you'd have.
QUESTION: Mm-hmm. And the training is how long?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: It's eight weeks at this time in the academies.
QUESTION: But those figures are monthly figures?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Yeah.
QUESTION: And what about the oil, the question about oil, then why does more money for oil infrastructure help when the real problem here is exploding pipelines and insurgent attacks?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, because we're trying to do a lot of things at the same time, and one of the things we're trying to do is to increase the Iraqi capacity to generate their own revenue, and the specific projects that they will target with this $450 million have a early payoff, according to the engineers, according to the analysis that was done.
QUESTION: Could you put this money into the overall context of the 18.4 billion, how much is being apportioned, or whatever, and what is going to the different sectors? Do you have an overall figure of, you know, 4 billion here or 3 billion there?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Of this -- of the 18.4 original spending plan, we are reprogramming, shifting 3.46 billion, and of that the -- of that 3.46 billion, 1.8 billion is -- you have the sheet. You've got it there.
QUESTION: Yeah, I've got the sheet, yeah.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Right, okay, yes. So --
QUESTION: What about the remainder of the money because money was allocated in March, for example, contracts were let? What happens to those contracts?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: They go forward.
QUESTION: They go forward?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: They go forward. They go forward, right, exactly. What essentially happened in this exercise is that an effort was made to identify projects, which weren't going to begin until fiscal year '05. So they were down in the future. So we brought that money forward to reprogram it in the programs and sectors that you have listed there. And our hope is, frankly that, in part, because of the investments in the oil sector, the Iraqis will have more of their own revenues and will choose to spend them on some of those same projects that they'd identified for our assistance, and also that other donors will come into the picture when they can identify specific projects in the water and power sectors, and that they'll do it.
MR. BOWAB: I see some hands up here.
QUESTION: Yeah, just to clarify, how much money has already been spent on security from reconstruction funds? I'm not talking about military funds, but I had heard a figure of 5 billion, that this will bring it to 5 billion, and I wonder if that's correct.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Now, I'd have to -- let me take that question to get it exactly right, but --
MR. BOWAB: I can answer that.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Joe.
MR. BOWAB: What you're talking about is, Congress appropriated money into ten sectors, okay. And you're talking about what's the total 18.4 breakdown into the ten sectors.
QUESTION: Yeah, I want the breakdown.
QUESTION: Also the police and security sectors.
MR. BOWAB: Okay. We can get you that breakdown. Yes, the 1.8will take the law enforcement and security just over $5 billion total, as far as the reprogramming.
QUESTION: Thanks. Okay, and just one other. If -- Ambassador Raphel, if you know, on a good day, what percentage of Iraqis have potable water and electricity?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, potable water, there are many definitions, but the one that we have been using indicates that really, in fact, very few Iraqis have access to good, standard, potable water. That's why everybody drinks out of bottled water.
QUESTION: Could I --
QUESTION: And electricity?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: The -- currently, between 10 and 14 hours per day is the average, countrywide.
QUESTION: I was also going to ask about the human dimension of this. This doesn't exist in a vacuum. Police are being killed daily. This additional expenditure that you're requesting of Congress, is this entirely to hire additional security people, or must you engage, necessarily, in more expensive training? Are you trying, perhaps, with better salaries, to get more professional, or whatever -- pick your adjective -- those -- it isn't just, is it just putting more police on the street, is it? You've got a mess, which, you know, nobody is talking about here.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: The overall -- the money will be spent on training, equipping and providing facilities, you know, repairing police stations. The plan is to build some more police academies in order to expand the overall capacity to train police.
Over time, clearly, more and more police will go through the police academy and get longer, better quality training. I mean, right now, for example, there are 82,000 police on the payroll, but not many of them have had proper training, so the idea is over time more and more will go through the full academy and specialized training after that.
QUESTION: I'm sorry. Don't take this as a critical or a -- I don't know what to call it -- or as a critical question. Do you feel there's an inexhaustible supply of people who are willing to stick their neck out and become police?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Thus far, there has been a very good response to recruitment efforts, a very good response.
QUESTION: I mean, aren't you -- I'm not there, but you know, aren't you reaching sort of the bottom of the barrel getting people who, they're so desperate for an income, they're willing to put their necks on the limb for the sake of their families, do you feel that that's not the situation?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: I don't think that's fair to the Iraqis at all.
QUESTION: No, I'm not trying to cast aspersions.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: I really don't, to suggest that there aren't people who are willing to step up. I think what's really impressive is how many people are willing to step up. And, you know, you're absolutely correct. Police and police stations and facilities have been under attack and, for the most part, I think that only increases the Iraqi resolve to demonstrate that they can protect their own citizens and their own country.
QUESTION: Got'cha. Thank you.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Yes.
QUESTION: Are you concerned that this reallocation might actually backfire and make the security situation worse in the following way: One of the keys to preventing attacks is intelligence -- having people on the ground come the U.S. military or to the U.S. Embassy or to Iraqi officials and telling them, "This is going to happen," part of an Iraqi society. By taking away money for reconstruction projects, are you afraid that the people will be less likely to see the U.S. as a friend and are doing stuff that are in the best interests of the Iraqi people, and therefore the quality of intelligence, the ability, their desire to help and prevent these attacks might decrease?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: No. In fact, we've seen month by month, week by week, an increase in the willingness of Iraqis to come forward. Generally speaking, I think that's, that's definitely the case. And in terms of what Iraqis want, Iraqis want security also. That's not our priority alone. That's the Iraqi priority. It's the priority of the Iraqi people. It's the priority of the Iraqi Government.
And then, finally, in terms of what we are actually taking away, I want to reiterate again what Under Secretary Grossman said, the effect of these reallocations changes the total amount of our $18.4 billion that is going to be spent on water and power, two very crucial sectors. In our original spending plan, it was going to be roughly 50 percent. In this spending plan, it will be roughly a third. So we are still making a very strong contribution to those two sectors.
And then to repeat again, the projects that are being deferred, that we ultimately won't do, but I really do believe either the Iraqis or somebody else will do, were projects that were scheduled to start a year from now. So you see, the immediate impact won't be felt by the Iraqis because they were down the line in the scheduling process.
QUESTION: Ambassador Raphel, the total numbers on adding boots on the ground security-wise, it's like plus 80,000, 81,000, roughly?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Right.
QUESTION: Early on --
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: 82. I think it's around 82 and it'll -- well, it's a rough estimate.
QUESTION: Roughly. Last summer, Secretary Rumsfeld sent a team of post-conflict experts into Iraq. Their primary recommendation was security, security, security, it's the big problem, reassess troops.
Why has it taken the Administration this long to realize that a huge new commitment of security personnel, it's roughly 50 percent of the size of the coalition forces on the ground, is necessary? Why has it taken so long?
QUESTION: I think, to be fair, that this has been a growing awareness, but building a program and figuring out how to shift our original plan has taken some time, but to reiterate what the Secretary said and what Marc Grossman said, you know, when you see the situation shifting on the ground, you adjust. And we've been in the process of adjusting. It's just that now we've finally got all the pieces and are ready to go to the Congress with the new plan.
QUESTION: But it shifted before the State Department was in charge, obviously, I mean --
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Sure.
QUESTION: Why didn't the Administration make moves like this a year ago?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, I think they've been considering it, thinking about it and working with the numbers, and so on. I mean, it's not just a -- this is not a sudden reallocation. It's the result of a lot of thinking going on over the months.
QUESTION: Because this plan still has to go through Congress, would it be unfair to conclude that in the short term, this isn't going to do a lot that help stop what we're seeing on a daily basis now, in terms of attacks?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Well, first of all, this reallocation won't affect programs that are ongoing. So the rate of expenditure, and so on, which we have seen pick up as contractors get on the ground and projects get going and people find their way around and figure out how to adjust to the security situation, work in a safe area on the days when there is trouble in another area, and so on, all of which has helped to increase the level of spending.
I think that will continue. And there are job creation programs going on now with USAID and the Office of Transitional Initiatives. There are the programs under the Commanders Emergency Response Program, the so-called CERP, and so on, but these will get more funding and more focus with this reallocation.
MR. CASEY: I think we really have time for just about one more.
A PARTICIPANT: Can we go back to Andrea?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: Okay. Sorry.
QUESTION: Ambassador Raphel, could you give us some specifics as to what these national guardsmen and police officers will be doing in terms of security? Who was doing it until now? Were these jobs that were carried out by U.S. military forces? Were they -- were these security jobs being done by anyone? And, if so, are eight weeks training really enough to substitute for what the U.S. military had done?
And if I could just also pick up on what Barry had raised with you earlier and your response to him, you said that there will be plenty of people who are willing to step up to fill these jobs. But what we've seen until now is that while many may be willing to step up, they also run away when faced with insurgent attacks.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: No, I think the record has been improving over the last weeks in terms of the performance of the Iraqi forces. So that's one thing. And I continue to believe that people will step up. The police, at the end of all of this, there will be 135,000 trained Iraqi police on the streets. Currently, as I said earlier, there are about 82,000 on the payroll, but over time, they will receive more training, there will be more vetting, and so on.
So you will end up with 135,000 of overall better trained police on the beat, and they will be performing normal police functions. One of the important pieces of the security increase is the doubling of the plan size of the border police. A lot of that function, checking at the borders, and so on, has been performed by coalition forces up to this point and we haven't, you know, we clearly haven't been able to spare enough people to be on the borders. And so, the Iraqis are going to take over that function in due course of the border police.
QUESTION: One last question.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: All right, one last question.
QUESTION: I just wanted to ask if you could confirm for us that the brigade that was designated to protect Fallujah, the Iraqi brigade, disbanded completely? And as it turns out, apparently a lot of them were helping the insurgents with money and weapons and training and all those things. Could you confirm that to us if that is true? It seems that departing Marine General Conway was saying this.
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: I think it's a little bit more complicated than that.
QUESTION: Could you explain?
AMBASSADOR RAPHEL: I think that I'll, if I could, I'll take that question.
1 Please see chart at the end of the transcript.
|Increases: ($ in millions) | |
|Security and Law Enforcement |$1,804 |
|Oil Capacity Enhancement |$450 |
|Economic Development |$380 |
|Debt reduction |$360 |
|Accelerated Employment |$286 |
|Democracy and Governance |$180 |
|Total |$3,460 |
|Decreases: | |
|Water and sewerage |$1,935 (from $4,247) |
|Electricity |$1,074 (from $5,465) |
|Refined Oil Purchases |$450 |
|Total |$3,460 |
Released on September 14, 2004